News:

"There is a terrible desperation to the increasingly pathetic rationalizations from the climate denial camp. This comes as no surprise if you take the long view; every single undone paradigm in history has died kicking and screaming, and our current petroleum paradigm 🐉🦕🦖 is no different. The trick here is trying to figure out how we all make it to the new ⚡ paradigm without dying ☠️ right along with the old one, kicking, screaming or otherwise." - William Rivers Pitt

Posted by: AGelbert

Eight former Brazilian Ministers of Environment issued a warning last week that the government of right-wing President Jair Bolsonaro is in the process of systematically destroying Brazil's environmental protection policies. They say the environmental ministry's powers are being stripped, and that deforestation of the Amazon is on the rise again. Marina Silva, who was the environmental minister under President Lula da Silva, called Bolsonaro an “exterminator of the future.”

After four months in office, Bolsonaro's environmental record has been devastating, Alexander Zaitchik told The Real News Network's Greg Wilpert.

“[There is a] massive wave of illegal incursions throughout the Amazon on two formerly protected lands by loggers, miners, agribusiness interests who are emboldened by the rhetoric coming out of the government, where they just feel like the laws won't be enforced,” Zaitchik said. “The agencies that have been empowered to protect what's what's left of the Brazilian Amazon—and again, we've already lost a fifth of it—are being held back. They're being defunded. They're being reshuffled, put under hostile ministers.”

Zaitchik detailed some of the effects on environmental agencies and infrastructure under Bolsonaro. Ibama, Brazil's Environmental Protection Agency, has lost nearly a quarter of its funds. The conservation agency ICMBO is being staffed by right-wing police officers, and all of its scientists have been fired. The Indian agency FUNAI, which assists Brazil's Indigenous groups, has had 90 percent of its funding withheld. Zaitchik added that what is happening in Brazil is similar to the U.S. under Trump, “where the scientific community is sort of seen as a hostile force.”

The role that the international community plays in terms of influencing Bolsonaro environmental policies will become increasingly important, just as it was in the '90s when Brazil's military dictatorships ramped up deforestation.

“A lot of the Indigenous leaders are going abroad, trying to raise the alarm about what's happening, and you know, they're meeting with government officials. And the governments of Asia and Europe and North America are going to be crucial in making sure that another 20 percent of the forest is not destroyed by the policies that Bolsonaro is putting in place right now,” Zaitchik said. “Scientists tell us that another 20 percent risks triggering this feedback loop called 'dieback' in which the forest will simply collapse, and its systems will no longer be able to sustain themselves.”

Posted by: AGelbert

Below, please observe, SEVERAL images that I have prepared over the years, that no longer display because they have been hackedso the link to Create-a-forum's website and server no longer functions .

The list is not complete, but, as you can see by the image descriptions (the only thing now showing), these images are all, directly or indirectly, severely critical of the 🦕🦖 Fossil Fuel 🐍 Fascists, who fund all efforts to keep the truth about how Greenhouse Gases CAUSE Catastrophic Climate Change from reaching we-the-people.

Considering how small this forum is, one would wonder why they bother. I believe that it isn't personal, just 🦖😈 business. The Hydrocarbon Hellspawn know their business model is endangered by the truth that they owe we-the-people BIG TIME for pillaging the environment. They don't want to be held responsible for their 24/7 Mens Rea Actus Reus Modus Operandi.

They know a picture really is worth (at least) a "thousand words". They are skilled at propaganda techniques, having used images for at least half a century to BULLSHIT people into believing that hydrocarbons are the "best thing since toasted bread, we will all die without hydrocarbons and we must bow and scrape to our loyal servants from Big Oil", while simultaneously dismissing Climate Change as "baloney".

So, they pay people hither and yon to continuously scan the internet for images that tell the Global Warming Causes and Consequences TRUTH. Once they identify them, they target them for hacking. The images below, that you cannot see, have been published on this forum, and others, including Disqus, over the last 5 years or so. I have copies of most of them in permanent, secured offline storage. However, the harm is done because all the posts where they appeared over the years now lack the images that accented them. 👎

The Hydrocarbon Hellspawn will eventually lose this fight to prevent paying for their responsibility for trashing the biosphere. BUT, it is quite possible that their Predatory Delay (one of the images I had to duplicate several times because they keep hacking it) may doom us to extinction.

HACKED!GIFs That Show the Effects of Climate ChangeSometimes nothing's as good as just showing people the GIFs. HACKED!Arctic ice receding over 15 years in National Geograhic atlases. National Geographic’s 2014 atlas update had a big change: the tiny Arctic ice sheet. It was the biggest update the publication’s made to their maps since the end of the Soviet Union. Now shipping companies and oil drilling companies are eyeing the Arctic for new shipping routes and drilling opportunities. HACKED!The Columbia Glacier in Alaska is one of the most dramatic examples of the effect of climate change on glaciers. The southern side of the glacier has receded 12 miles in 30 years, and the remaining parts of the glacier in the Chugach mountains are thinner.HACKED!The Sierra Nevada mountains are looking a little barren these days. The Yosemite Conservancy has a number of webcams set up around the national park, and these shots from their High Sierra camera, prominently featuring Half Dome, were all taken around the same time each year from 2011 to 2016. The dramatic change in snow cover shows just how bad California’s drought is, even in the mountains.HACKED!DestructionDestructionDestructionDestructionDestructionDeforestation in the Amazon for agriculture and development is releasing a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere. In fact, deforestation worldwide is responsible for about 15 percent of CO2 emissions.Greenland Ice melt HACKED!glacier stream melt HACKED! mountain Glacier melt HACKED! Earth's Melting Glaciers Captured in Stunning Before-and-After Images 1 HACKED!

Agelbert NOTE (of hope): I am in the process of duplicating most of the lost images SEVERAL times. It will cost the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn more money to keep hacking my images.

The hacked images from Dr. Brown in the list above came from the following videos. It is clear that the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn DO NOT want you to see those images which were taken from the videos.

Although the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn have been busy trying to make videos that tell the Global Warming Truth go away (Facebook has now gotten a "fact checking" group funded by the 🦕🦖 Koch Brothers - U-tube keeps "disappearing" videos critical of Big Oil), the videos by Dr. Brown are still 👍 viewable.

It really BOTHERS the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn that those videos are out there. For that reason alone, I recommend you view them, copy them, take screenshots of graphs in them, save said screenshots in your computer, and tell all your friends about them.

Just think of the hearburn you're causing the fossil fuel fascists!

While you are having fun at Hydrocarbom Hellspawn expense, you just might save the biosphere for future generations!

The Fossil Fuelers 🦖 DID THE Clean Energy Inventionssuppressing, Climate Trashing, human healthdepleting CRIME, but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks 🦀, they are trying to AVOID DOING THE TIME or PAYING THE FINE! Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!

Posted by: AGelbert

I note with interest that those who want to "cull the human population" are not among the first to volunteer.

Yes, I've noticed that too. However, they do have a quick answer to that somewhat incongruous position. You see, these "brilliant luminaries" showing us the way to the culling "solution" do not want to deprive the human family of those "benevolent genius skills" that they unselfishly use for the good of all humanity. If these favored fellows were first in line for the culling, we would lose all their "wisdom and benevolent guidance". These "benevolent geniuses" need to be there to guide us to good things (for the "benevolent genius" humans like them, of course).

Tell me about it. I had a small war with some fine fellows who have fecal coliform invasion syndrome in there glial cells (their brains are full of Hydrocarbon Hellspawn happy talk propaganda bullshit).

I went back there today and tried to educate one of them with a (slightly ) more polite approach. Hopefully, it helped some reader who comes accross it.

FWIW, I'm posting it below with the response sequence. It may be useful to you as you encounter more and more of this wishful thinking insane crap that gets gets pushed by the hydrocarbon hellspawn, more and more, as things get inevitably get more dire:

mipakJust paint everything white and make the sun bounce back to space at a proportion to just cooling us off (not too much!). White Streets (black stripes instead of white ones!), white roof tops, all white cars, white painted grass (football will never be the same), etc, etc. Of course this is preposterous just as is the other stuff. The best solution is to pare down the population from about 7 billion to 2 billion and then make everything electric. But of course mankind will never agree to that.

agelbert > mipak 👎 Preposterous.

Go study GHG absorption frequencies before you display such ignorance about how albedo actually works.

Here's a clue. It is true that albedo of white stuff in the Arctic and Antarctic works to keep heat (IR radiation) from being absorbed by the atmosphere.

However, white stuff located SOUTH of the Arctic circle (and NORTH of the Antarctic corresponding area) DOES NOT provide enough albedo to get the solar radiation out into space before it is trapped in our atmosphere.

WHY? Because the more direct angle of the solar rays striking the surface of the earth where most of us live causes the incoming photons to get converted into IR frequencies right away, even from white stuff reflecting them. IR (infrared) frequency rays get trapped by CO2 before they can exit.

As to your "cull the human population solution", nature will take care of that.

Omega Centauri > agelbert • 14 hours agoHuh. No, the two options for a photon hitting the surface are (1) absorb and turn into heat -later emitted as IR, or (2) reflected. Sure most "white" surfaces heat up, but not nearly as much as dark surfaces. But, the reflected photons got to make it back through the atmosphere, if they hit clouds they might just reflect back down. So you get less of an effect than a simple computation would suggest.

Some researchers at U of Colorado invented a surface material that reflects so well -and emits IR well too, that in full sunlight it is cooler than the ambient air. They want to use this to cool buildings without needing energy. Deployed over large areas it might help reduce the global temp a bit.

agelbert > Omega Centauri • 2 hours agoWell, let me parse what you said a bit, because you are operating under some simplistic, and partly erroneous, assumptions about photon energy frequency bands.

There are several options in regard to the effects of photon reflection activity frequencies, not just two.

As you know, an incoming photon, by the time it gets to the surface of the earth, has been stripped of much of its higher frequencies in the upper UV band. That is why we don't all die when sunlight hits us, as would happen if we were exposed to UV C during daylight hours.

The ozone layer way up there does that bit of frequency downshifting. 👍

Every bit of downshifting from then on gets rid of some UV B, but the visible spectrum band of several frequencies inside those incoming photons is still not in the Infrared band. That is why those photons don't get trapped on the way in by CO2 or CH4 or H2O (Greenhouse Gases that have several different IR absorption bands BUT do not absorb UV or visible spectrum photon bands - i.e. UV and visible light goes right through GHG on the way in).

The instant a visible light (several photon frequencies, not just one) photon package hits the surface of the earth, no matter how reflecting said surface is, some downshifting occurs, these lower energy photons, as when light hits a white colored and/or mirrored surface, already contain some infrared band frequencies they did not have. That bit of IR won't make it past the GHG blanket. Any UV that the incoming photon had has been downshifted into the visible light spectrum (or infrared, as happens when UV gets past your sunblock and/or all the way to your epidermal DNA to start you on the way to skin cancer).

Now for the rest of the photon package reflecting off the white or mirrored surface. The reflected photons are in the slightly downshifted visible light spectrum. That's for highly reflective surfaces - the lion's share, 99% PLUS of this planet's surface reflects IR frequency bands, with a tiny portion, enough for us to see what is around us, in the visible light spectrum frequencies our eyes are designed to detect.

That light massively downshifts to 99% PLUS infrared frequency bands (there are several IR frequency bands, not just one - GHG absorbtion frequencies match them nearly perfectly BECAUSE the tri-atomic nature of said GHG set up a photon bouncing trap for infrared bands).

Making buildings reflective of visible light does nothing to cool the atmosphere simply because the visible light photons quickly degrade to IR photons that will never make it back to outer space before either H2O (atmospheric water vapor, that is increasing massively because of baked in global warming - see: positive feedback deleterious heat increasing loop), CO2 or CH4 traps them and we continue to COOK because of incredibly STUPID people that think we can keep burning hydrocarbons without suffering the horrendous, Sixth Massive Extinction Consequences.

Posted by: AGelbert

Posted by: AGelbert

Agelbert NOTE: As I have said for YEARS, the old, "We are all in this together (i.e. we are all "equally to blame" for the biosphere damage and "must share equally" the costs of mitigation )" TRICK is the BIG PLAN of the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn AND polluter pals everywhere.

April 26, 2019

History Of Denial Belies Present Day Position of Nat’l Assoc of Manufacturers

On Monday, the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project, the National Association of Manufacturers’ special project to fight #ExxonKnew and similar climate lawsuits, put out a statement about how “we are all in this together,” as though it were a friendly actor on board with climate action. “Only by working side-by-side to tackle climate change,” the front group wrote, “can we make a real difference.” The statement concludes by reiterating that kumbaya unity, saying that “on Earth Day, let’s stop looking backward and start moving forward to work collaboratively on substantive policies. Only then will we have any real impact.”

But NAM’s already had quite a real impact on climate, and that impact is why it doesn’t want people looking backwards to see if anyone mislead the public about climate change. As it turns out, NAM was a key convener of one of the earliest organized climate change denial networks, the Global Climate Coalition.

As a new trove of documents hosted at ClimateFiles reveal, the oil, coal, gas and utility-funded group was instrumental in early efforts to inject doubt into the public’s perception of climate science throughout the 1990’s and played an obstructive role in the early IPCC and UN COP meetings.

In a new post at DeSmogBlog, Mat Hope describes how the GCC went after the IPCC in the ‘90s, spending hundreds of thousands of its energy-industry-provided dollars on an “IPCC Tracker fund” in the run-up to the 1997 Kyoto meeting to make sure the group knew everything that was happening in the protracted IPCC process. Despite being keenly and intimately involved in the peer-review process, to the extent that it bragged about how “language proposed by the GCC was accepted almost in its entirety,” it nonetheless publicly attacked the peer review process.

Over at ClimateLiability News, Karen Savage reports this week that GCC appears to have coordinated a series of attacks on IPCC author Dr. Ben Santer in the Wall Street Journal and similar outlets. Santer, of course, was the lead author of the chapter in the 1995 IPCC report that ultimately declared that “the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on climate.” Those 12 words were negotiated at length in a process that GCC (and their allies in the Saudi and Kuwaiti delegations) was a part of, but once the sentence was published in the report, deniers claimed it was cooked up by Santer alone in some smokey back room, in violation of IPCC rules.

Savage also provides documents showing a draft of a primer on climate change, written by a real climate scientist for GCC’s Science and Technology Assessment Committee (STAC), which reads in no uncertain terms that climate change science “is well established and cannot be denied.” The primer also pointed out that the work of deniers like Patrick Michaels and Richard Lindzen “raise interesting questions about our total understanding of climate processes, but they do not offer convincing arguments against the conventional model of greenhouse gas emission-induced climate change.”

So the GCC was told plainly that the science was undeniable, and deniers’ work was unconvincing. Yet instead of adopting a position the group purports to be taking now, nearly three decades later, it instead removed those statements altogether.In its place, the GCC added attacks on Santer’s findings and further language focusing on uncertainty of the science.

It’s no surprise, then, that NAM is concerned enough about climate liability lawsuits to😈 set up a whole new project to fight them--a project that writes Earth Day bromides about the importance of focusing on the future, and not the past.

If we did start “looking backwards,” we might see how NAM already had plenty of “real impact” when it “worked collaboratively” with fossil fuel money to deceive the public about the need to reduce emissions.

Posted by: AGelbert

Carbon Capture’s Global Investment Would Have Been Better Spent On Wind & Solar

April 21st, 2019 by Michael Barnard

Recently, a firm called Carbon Engineering received $68 million in investment from a trio of fossil fuel majors for its air carbon capture solution. This triggered a five-part CleanTechnica series on Carbon Engineering, its approach and why it is not a serious answer to global warming. The process of researching the series and discussions around it raised the question of what the total global investment in carbon capture and sequestration has gained us. The answer is grim, but there’s a great news story that emerges from the sooty ashes of carbon capture.

Wind & solar are displacing roughly 35 times as much CO2 every year as the complete global history of CCS

The first piece of the puzzle is just figuring out how much has been spent on carbon capture schemes globally. There aren’t good sources publicly available on this point, but there are multiple press releases for major investments. Where there was obviously work being done but not dollar values, some extrapolation was required, so the numbers for China and the Middle East are approximations. Those are only capital costs with no operating costs and they are moving millions of tons around, so the operating costs are non-trivial and also unreported in easily available sources. The majority of that money has been spent in the past decade.

The build-up gets close enough to $7.5 billion to round up for the purposes of the analysis.

There’s a global organization with some 40 staff devoted to reporting on carbon capture and producing glowing reports of its successes, the Global CCS Institute. It claims to be “an international climate change organisation whose mission is to accelerate the deployment of CCS as an imperative technology in tackling climate change and providing energy security.” A review of its membership finds a lot of a fossil fuel majors, and the energy security claim is an interesting add-on to its mandate. It seems more like a PR arm of the fossil fuel industry, especially after reviewing global carbon capture results.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the Global 🐉🦕🦖 CCS Institute works really hard to avoid talking even about the capital costs. Its reports talk about the great work being done to reduce costs without actually, you know, specifying how much money has been spent vs how much carbon has been sequestered.

The Global CCS Institute maintains a database of ‘large’-scale carbon capture facilities. It mostly doesn’t track actual sequestration but merely annual potential. The ‘large’ is in quotes because there are only 19 of them and only three of them exceed a million tons a year. The scale of the problem is in gigatons, so when there are a total of three facilities bigger than 4 orders of magnitude too small, calling the set large is at best relative and in reality a misnomer. It was necessary to extract the data and extrapolate potential net sequestration.

Of the 19 ‘large’-scale plants, only 4 are not just pumping CO2 into oil wells for enhanced oil recovery. Per a workup done for the Carbon Engineering series, every ton of CO2 pumped into the ground returns 0.9 tons of CO2 when the resulting oil is burned. So enhanced oil recovery use of CO2 is at best 10% sequestration, and the vast majority of CO2 in carbon capture schemes is used for that purpose. This doesn’t account for leakages in the process or the carbon-cost of moving millions of tons of CO2 around, but it’s one of a series of efforts made to give carbon capture and sequestration as much credit as possible. It needs it.

Only Norway seems to be serious, and it’s still at a pretty trivial level. Its Sleipner and Snřhvit CO2 Storage facilities have been operating for 1–2 decades and have sequestered about 30 million tons of CO2.

The next part of the analysis was assessing what the carbon avoidance value of spending the same money on wind generation instead. Two approaches were taken. The first was a 1-decade view as the majority of investment was spent then. The second was a 5-decade view aligning wind investments to when carbon capture facilities came on line.

Once again, the carbon capture approaches were treated generously. The decade saw roughly 22 million tons of CO2 sequestered by facilities that became operational. Every CCS facility was considered to achieve maximum annual results for each of the years of the decade they were active even though few of them have achieved that, with Boundary Dam in Canada as one example accidentally operating at 40% for a year without anyone noticing. In at least one case, the approach counts most of a year for CCS when it came in during November of the year. The only hardships imposed on CCS were an accurate accounting for the percentage actually sequestered when it’s being used for EOR and exclusion of historical capture facilities in the 10 year view, but that’s addressed in the 50-year view.

The wind generation was limited to onshore sites. Slightly stale metrics for the capital cost of wind energy ($2 million per MW) were used. Wind generation was assumed to be in average wind regimes as opposed to the Great Plains of the USA so that their capacity factors were only 40%. The expenditure was loaded more to recent than past. The avoided fossil fuel generation was assumed to be 1:1 per MWh, but assumed for the first cut to be an even mix of coal and gas generation for 0.8 tons per MWh of emissions. Carbon capture is being given every opportunity to show its value with these constraints.

Under those generous conditions, if $7.5 billion had been spent on wind energy instead of CCS over the past decade, about 50% more CO2 would have been avoided than spending the same money on sequestration. About 33 million tons of CO2 wouldn’t have been emitted by fossil fuel sources while about 22 million tons were sequestered by more recent schemes.

If the avoided generation was all coal with its 1.1 tons of CO2 per MWh, then the avoided CO2 would be in the range of 50 million tons of CO2. If it were replacing coal and gas according to their percentages of 38.3% and 23.1% of global generation respectively, then the avoidance would be in the range of 40 million tons.

This excludes the long-running (and pretty cheap) Norwegian approaches as they are outside of the limit, and long-term enhanced oil recovery feeds such as the US Shute Creek Gas Processing Plant which has been pumping out CO2 for enhanced oil recovery since 1986.

To avoid excluding large sequestration schemes, the 50-year perspective is useful, spending roughly equivalent amounts of capital on wind farms instead of sequestration in each year a major CCS facility came on line, starting with 1972. Again the facilities were assumed to be operating at maximum sequestration each year, the undoubtedly higher operational costs were ignored and zero leakage in the process including in the long-term store was assumed. For the wind generation, the capacity factor for older wind farms was dropped from the 40% used in the initial model to 30%. The table is too large to include, so results will be summarized. If anyone wants to look at the underlying data in detail, it’s available.

If wind generation had been built each year instead of the various CCS schemes, roughly 122 million tons of CO2 would have been avoided instead of the very generous 85 million tons the schemes managed. That’s 37 million tons or 43% more. Frankly, it was surprising to see that even under generous treatment carbon capture achieved this much.

If the avoided generation was all coal with its 1.1 tons of CO2 per MWh, then the avoided CO2 would be in the range of 170 million tons of CO2, double the best case scenario for CCS. If it were replacing coal and gas according to their percentages of 38.3% and 23.1% of global generation respectively, then the avoidance would be in the range of 130 million tons, over 50% better.

Another piece of context: Global oil and gas revenues were about $2 trillion in 2017 alone. They’ve managed to get governments to shell out for a lot of the carbon capture costs. Let’s assume they managed 25% coverage to be, yet again, overly generous. The $7.5 billion at 75% over 10 years turns into about $600 million a year. A little math tells us that CCS is consuming at best 0.03% of the annual budgets of oil and gas globally. Interestingly, that’s about exactly the amount that three oil and gas majors ‘invested’ in the Carbon Engineering direct air capture company recently.

Does that look serious? Or does that look like PR dollars for social license to continue to pump oil?

Right now there is roughly 600 GW of wind generation capacity globally. It is displacing about 1,800 million tons of CO2 annually, about 22 times as much as the best case global total scenario for CCS. There is another 400 GW of utility-scale solar capacity, which is displacing roughly another 1,200 million tons of CO2 annually. Wind and solar are displacing between them roughly 35 times as much CO2 every year as the complete global history of CCS.

We’re seeing about 100 GW of new wind and solar capacity annually around the world. That 100 GW of capacity will displace roughly 300 million tons every year for its lifetime. Given the roughly 30-year lifespan, each year we are building wind and solar capacity that will displace roughly 9,000 million tons of CO2, over 100 times the total global carbon capture history. And once again, the operational and maintenance costs of wind and solar are a fraction of the CCS approaches.

CCS is a rounding error in global warming mitigation. It’s hard to see how it could possibly be more. And it brings into stark relief the unfortunate reality that the IPCC depends far too much on carbon capture and sequestration approaches in terms of dealing with global warming.

Agelbert COMMENT: Mike, here is an idea that you may want to look into. As you know, I am a vociferous critic of Carbon Capture and Sequestration technology (i.e. taking a portion of CO2 out of the continued INCREASE), which I consider a scam and a mens rea deliberate diversion/obfuscation from the sine qua non goal of reaching 350 PPM (i.e. subtracting CO2 from our biosphere).

All that said, perhaps there is a way to do that with technology, above and beyond the plant based (i.e. giant Lemna minor ponds in desert areas).

Though I haven't read anything about it yet, I'm sure the Hydrocarbon Industry is looking into this really efficient CCS technology (though certainly with a jaundiced eye) that I propose.

What I am talking about is extracting CO2, not from the atmosphere, but from the ocean, where it is far more concentrated than in the air.

I recently read this: "People get confused about the difference between ocean HEAT absorption (which is 93%) to greenhouse gas absorption by the sea, (which is 25%). Since 93% of our excess heat goes into the ocean, that means only 7% is causing the disruption we are feeling now!

If the ocean takes less carbon dioxide, as scientists predict, then not only will there be more greenhouse gases, but those gases will remain longer, and become a larger share of our actual emissions in the atmosphere."

As you can see, the ocean captures a lot of CO2. The oceans, so far, have acted asa giant atmospheric heat limiting buffer, taking up a significant share of the CO2 emissions from the burning of hydrocarbons in human civilization. Unlike the atmospheric CO2, the CO2 in the oceans is much more concentrated (i.e. easier to collect).

According to scientists, the oceans are getting to the point where they cannot absorb CO2 at the same rate.

Well, doesn't that mean that Dr. Keith and his hydrocarbon industry well funded pals could, maybe, come up with some CCS underwater technology that would actually SUBTRACT CO2 from the biosphere?

It is obvious that it is easier to extract CO2 from a medium that has a higher concentration of those molecues.

That medium is ocean water. The CO2 is mostly present in the form of HCO3, which is causing ocean acidification and killing shell forming life forms that constitute the base of the ocean trophic pyramid food chain.

I'm sure any government would favor funding this technology because it helps keep ocean life viable. The fishing industry would applaud, of course.

It would also help oceans to continue to absorb the 25% of CO2 (and 93% of the heat) that they now absorb from the atmosphere, to our benefit.

The "downside" for the hydrocarbon industry is that, of course, there are no undersea profit over planet power plants belching out CO2 that they can play some CCS scam game with.

Ocean CCS would actually help the biosphere in general and humans in particular, unlike the CCS air capture fraud.

Hopefully, Dr. Keith and friends will start thinking this is a good idea, instead of thinking with their short term profit wallet.

If you learn of any of this research, please share it in your article series. The survival of human civilization may very well depend on efficient undersea CCS.

Chevron’s Fig Leaf Part 5: Who Is Behind Carbon Engineering, & What Do Experts Say?

SNIPPET:

But there’s more about Dr. Keith. Not long ago he co-authored a study with one of the members of his geoengineering group stating that wind farms would create global warming. Yes, that’s right. One of the major solutions to CO2 emissions from fossil fuels is actually a problem, according to Keith. He and his collaborator’s thinking was deeply shoddy and much mocked when it came out. Once again, that paper was in Joule, the no-impact-factor, brand-new journal that his latest Carbon Engineering paper is in. Perhaps there’s something to be learned from that? The co-author of the wind-farms cause global warming nonsense paper, Lee Miller, was lead author with Keith as co-author in another much-derided attack on wind energy, claiming it had massive limits to the ability to provide power.

Expect "smart" people like Dr. Keith to advocate the following solar geo-engineering "solution" when 2036 Catastrophic Climate Change massive atmospheric heating is everywhere on the globe:

The above civilization bankrupting BOONDOGLE, would actually work to lower temperatures. However, it would do absolutely nothing to prevent the death of keystone shell forming species at the base of the ocean food pyramid. They would continue to die from ocean acidification due to CO2 uptake in the oceans.

To that "slight problem" of dead oceans, the fossil Fuel Industry, of course, has an answer too (see below).

THIS is the bottom line for the Fossil Fuel Industry, despite what all the credentialed bought and paid for lying, ethics free, empathy deficit disorderd scientists claim:

Posted by: AGelbert

Chevron’s Fig Leaf Part 4: Carbon Engineering’s Only Market Is Pumping More Oil

April 19th, 2019 by Michael Barnard

SNIPPET:

Carbon Engineering recently garnered $68 million in investment in its air-carbon capture technology from three fossil fuel majors. This is part 4 of the 5 article series assessing the technology and the value of the investment.

The first piece summarized the technology and the challenges, and did a bottoms-up assessment to give context for what Carbon Engineering is actually doing. The second piece stepped through Carbon Engineering’s actual solution in detail. The third piece returned to the insurmountable problem of scale and deals with the sheer volume of air that must be moved and the scale of machinery they have designed for the purpose. This fourth article will look at the market for air carbon capture CO2 and assess why three fossil fuel majors might be interested. The final article will address the key person behind this technology and the expert opinions of third parties.

There is zero net removal of CO2 from the atmosphere if air carbon capture is used for enhanced oil recovery.

Agelbert COMMENT: This is a well thought out, thoroughly researched and accurately presented series of articles. Thank you, Michael Barnard 💐, for telling it exactly how it is.

I've thought about the Carbon Dioxide issue for several years. I have always questioned the motives behind the hydrocarbon industry cheerleading CO2 capture and sequestration.

IMHO, after looking at this from several reality based angles (unlike the unreality based happy talk pushing MO of the 🦕😈🦖 fossil fuelers), the fact that the best present day technology to keep the CO2 concentration down (which is used in Nuclear Submarines, which are forced to surface every six months because they cannot keep CO2 below 8,000 PPM after that time period) cannot get CO2 levels anywhere near 5,000 PPM, never mind the 350 PPM we desperately need to get back to in order to avoid the worse effects of the Sixth Mass Extinction now in progress from excessive GHG emissions, evidences that the proposed CO2 reduction technology, euphemistically called "capture and sequestration" technology, is a fraud. 👎

IOW, all the technofixes out their refuse to admit that the GOAL here is NOT to keep the Hydrocarbon Industry profitable. The GOAL is 350 PPM, period. Anything else is simply wishful thinking.

So, IMHO, we have to resort to biological solutions involving rapid photosynthesis.

I researched this thoroughly. There is no plant life that can beat algea at rapid photosynthesis, which is the sine qua non requirement for reaching the 350 PPM goal, but algae is so hydrophylic (water loving) that too much energy is required to dry it for storage. 👎 No, passive solar energy will not work to dry algae. That has been tried unsuccessfully. Also, algea can grow rapidly only in a very narrow range of the biosphere.👎 Algea is not the answer.

🤔👨‍🔬

But, there is a floating plant, the tiniest angiosperm (flowering plant) known to science, that can do the job of rapid photosynthesis that we need on a planetary scale. 🌍🌎🌏🌞

► It is extremely hardy.

► It grows in nearly all areas of the planet, with a longer growing season that any other plant life form except phytoplankton.

► It doubles it's mass every 48 hours or so, depending on the availability of Sunlight, Carbon Dioxide and cheap fertilizer like pig feces.

► It is tiny, but not microscopic. It can easily be harvested without heavy machinery.

► It can even be used as animal feed AND supplemental nutrition for humans too.

► It has been used to clean ponds and lakes of toxic heavy metals. When used for this pupose, it becomes poisonous and must be treated as hazardous waste.

The common name is Duckweed, of which there are a number of species of floating plants. My favorite is Lemna minor✨🌞

The science based case for a planet scale Lemna minor project has actually been made by evidence of a floating plant when the Arctic had shallow freshwater seas (millions of years ago). Scientists now believe a rapid cooling that took place at that time, even though the CO2 level was even higher then than it is today, was directly caused by the proliferation of Azolla floating plants in that sea. They rapidly lowered the CO2 levels, sinking when they died and being replaced by others, until ice formed over them. They cooled ALL of Earth's atmosphere ⛄ from a CO2 PPM concentration that was higher than the one we are saddled with now.

"This freshwater surface layer allowed Azolla to repeatedly spread across the ocean surface forming mats of vegetation during a succession of episodes called the ‘the Arctic Azolla Event‘. The event lasted for almost a million years from about 50 to 49 million years ago."

True, we do not ⌛ 🌡️ have a million years or so to do the job, but we don't need more than a few decades to scale this biological CO2 sequestering program to all desert areas of the planet on gigantic shallow (a little more than one meter of depth is all you need) artificial lakes.

True, the fact remains that this aquatic family of plants, like Azolla, requires plenty of water, a resource that is mostly not available in desert areas. THAT, however, is a problem that human engineering CAN solve, unlike trying to get CO2 down to 350 PPM with technology that cannot even keep it below 5,000 PPM!

If Azolla in the Arctic freshwater sea 50 million years ago, a tiny portion of the planetary surface, could cool down an overheated atmosphere with a much higher CO2 PPM concentration than we have now, there is no rational excuse for not duplicating that event with a crash program to grow Duckweed in all the non-arable land areas of the planet. 👍👍👍

The Hydrocarbon Hellspawn have NOTHING to offer. They CANNOT DELIVER an atmospheric CO2 PPM reduction to 350 PPM. All they can do is bill us for technofixes that allow them to profit over planet while the CO2 concentration continues to rise!

Proof of concept graphic (obviously the ponds will have to be at least a million times bigger than those shown and made from natural materials with Renewable energy powered machinery):

This video pushes Duckweed as a biofuel source. I post it so you can see how fast it grows. I still believe we certainly can use Duckweed for biofuels, but the most vitally important use we need to make of this fast growing plant is the reduction of CO2 from our atmosphere 🔊 NOW, before the biosphere we depend on is cooked! ☠️ 😱

The Fossil Fuelers 🦖 DID THE Clean Energy Inventionssuppressing, Climate Trashing, human healthdepleting CRIME, but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks 🦀, they are trying to AVOID DOING THE TIME or PAYING THE FINE! Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!

Posted by: AGelbert

Venezuela has become a popular argument against socialism amongst conservatives because of the deep economic crisis it is currently traversing. Defenders of the Bolivarian project, though, say that US sanctions and economic war are to blame for the crisis. Greg Wilpert presents an analysis that tries to take all the factors into account

Posted by: AGelbert

Since a hacker has locked the "Hydrocarbon Crooks Evil Actions" topic so only Admins can post on it, I am starting a new topic thread with a slightly modified name.

NOTICE TO THE HACKER: I will do this OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN until you get tired of your fun and games. If you persist with your folly, you will leave a track record and the big dogs at Create-A-Forum will ruin your fun and games, so NOW!

Have a nice day, Mr. Bought and Paid for 🐒 TOOL of the 🦕🦖Hydrocarbon Hellspawn Fossil Fuel Government.

Posted by: AGelbert

Trump’s attempt to undo Obama’s protections was “unlawful” and a violation of the federal Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, Gleason ruled. Presidents have the power under that law to withdrawareas from the national 🐉 oil 🦖 and gas 🦕 leasing program, as Obama did, but only Congress has the power to add areas to the leasing program, she said.

The Obama-imposed leasing prohibitions “will remain in full force and effect unless and until revoked by Congress,” Gleason said in her ruling.

֍ You no longer have to listen to RE trying to rope you in to more fruitless arguments by making the patently false claim that, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen" . The issue is NOT your ability to debate or a question of pride. The ISSUE is that debating a fallacious debating technique using oponent is worse than talking in an echo chamber. Once you have determined that the debater is operating on mens rea, it is downright dumb to continue said exercise in cardiovascular health degrading frustration. You DO NOT NEED all those extra stress hormones coursing through your system. It is BAD for you. A guy like me MIGHT make the claim that, since my problem, unlike yours, is Bradycardia (too slow to occasionally nada for several seconds or more heartbeat), a routine shouting match can replace my pacemaker! The reason for that is that increased heart rate is just ONE of the responses your body has to stress hormones. A brief study of what Cortisol DOES to shorten your lifespan clearly explains why routine strife with fellow humans is not a good idea. I increase my heart rate five days a week for 40 minutes on a treadmill. Some Cortisol is produced, BUT plenty of health promoting and preserving hormones are produced simultaneously. 👍 Sorry to be long winded! This was supposed to be a brief pep talk!

The Surlyzone sounds like a great idea. Remember that RE does not have the time to tend Facebook. I remember when he convinced you to take the job. I remember you asking if anyone wanted to do that. I didn't say a word because I did not want anything to do with Facebook (My wife has a page but that's her thing, not mine). RE is a single minded fellow. He will want you back at the Doomed Diner. Consequently, I do not think he will interfere with you doing your thing on the Facebook portion of the DD. Why not just relabel the DD Facebook page to the Surlyzone? You can keep your admin privileges and assuage RE by keeping links back to the DD from the Surlyzone 😎. YOU built that Facebook page all by yourself. RE has no basis to complain about a name label change, as long as page vistors still can go to the DD (though he will not be a happy camper , of course).

I am biased, of course. BUT, if it was up to me, I would just do what appears to be the best thing to do from the point of view of constructive, fruitful, instead of fruitless, communication that promotes good will and Social Justice.

As to K-Dog and the pod under his bed, I would apply Occam's razor there and point to a family member, possibly his wife, who suspects him of fooling around. Before my divorce way back in 1987, I put a voice activated tape recorder secretly linked to my home telephone. That is how I confirmed my wife's adultery. That was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, thank God.

At any rate, remember my friend, that your interaction with the people you physically come in contact with every day, in regard to their welfare and yours, is far more important than the intellectual stimulation you get from all of us out here on the internets.

Posted by: AGelbert

Another way I have of spreading information to combat all the brainwashing people are subjected to out there is to use graphics. In the Gallery of this forum (it's easier to view than the one at the Doomstead Diner, IMHO ) you can see how many times a graphic has been viewed. That gives me a feel for what people are interested in (or want to eliminate 😈, as is often the case with the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn 🦕🦖).

If you peruse the Gallery you will notice duplicated graphics here and there. That is because the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn 🦕🦖 like to hack images that make them unhappy. So, I have resorted to making copies. I keep the originals in my computer and make a copy when a hacking occurs. I don't know HOW they do it (I change my password routinely and use LONG, diffcult to crack, passwords), but every now nd then a graphic I use a lot will not take, even if formatted properly. On Disqus, where no "image" formating is required, it just does not show. This is one way I KNOW that SOMEONE out there is watching me and I must be doing something right because they are selectively trying to surreptitiously censor me. The nature of the hacked images points squarely at the 🐉🦕🦖 Hydrocarbon Hellspawn.

And THAT is with a TINY viewership! 😟

Surly, I am convinced that if the viewership on this forum was routinely above that 52 count, the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn/Trumpoids/Fascists'R'US Hackers would make life very, very difficult for me.

Perhaps those evil 🦍 CAPITALIST bastards have anticipated that and are busy sending links somewhere else when I link back to the Renewable Revolution on Disqus. I don't know but I would not put it past them. As a former computer analyst, I know it can be done, even if I have never learned the ins and outs of server traffic rerouting.

Nevertheless, I will continue to do what I can to get more people to view posts here, though I will not do Facebook. For now, I just keep on doing what I can in my small way.

I am content, although it is refreshing to have a fellow warrier fighting for social justice, like you, posting here.

Your story puts me in mind of the parable of the blind men and the elephant.

As you know, the parable originated in ancient India, from where it made the rounds in many different cultures. However the meaning of the popular proverb differs in other countries. A group of blind men, who have never come across an elephant before and who feel a different part of the elephant's body, and then describe the elephant based on their limited experience. Of course, their descriptions are different from each other. The moral being that humans tend to claim absolute truth based on their limited, subjective experience as they ignore other people's limited, subjective experiences.

I know some limited things about WP. You know some stuff about Discus and Createaforum, whereas I would never even have the gumption to stand up such a thing.

Likewise I don't know about people hijacking graphics. I tend to rely on Occam's razor in such matters, and figure it's me that is **** up. Which is not to gainsay your experience; I don't know what is happening, but efforts like this, and even DD, are too small to attract t much notice on the part of the surveillance state.

But on. the other hand, there is the experience of K-Dog to consider, as described on the Diner.

Anyhow, I am glad to come on over here and pitch some stuff up from time to time. Nice place ya got here, AG!!

Thanks Bro. I'm glad for your company. ✨

As to the graphics, I may be paranoid, but that don't mean they ain't out to GIT me.

Sorry about the censor on this forum. The place is free and words like (without the hyphen) fu-ck, sh-it, pi-ss, and, as ridiculous as it seems, even gam-ble (and so on) are automatically X'ed out 🙊.

The word BULLSHIT is okay though! I use that one a lot, though certainly never in regard to the content of my posts.

I have a partial list of hacked images (they do not display). Here is one of them:

You don't see a thing, do you? Me neither.Well, it is there. It is in my "All Graphics Enchilada" (I told you how I store my smileys and other images for quick use some years ago) document with the exact same code generated when I created the graphic.

Now if you take that "http link and slap it on the internets, here is what you GET:

Quote

Create a Forum Free Forum HostingHOMESIGN UPFORUM DIRECTORYSUPPORTBLOGHmmm, we can not find a forum with that addressDid you mean to create a forum?You can sign up for a free forum here.

ALL the hacked ones give EXACTLY the same results. 😈 Still, the elephant may be just a big mouse or an irrelevant moose. So, we need to look at the nature of the images that don't show AND the ones that are always good to go. Smileys are always good to go. I've never had a problem there. To make a long study short, with the exception of a gif of dripping water, that I have used repeatedly to imply that we-the-people have just about HAD IT with government fascist corruption, ALL of the images that do not show are images that attack, expose, or otherwise criticize the Fossil Fuel Industry's Profit Over People and Planet mendacious propaganda which is peddled to undermine the threat of Catastrophic Climate Change to the biosphere in general, and humans in particular.

I may be groping in the dark but this thing sure feels like a Republican Fascist Elephant to me! However, I have not presented my case to you with some evidence that may convince you that something very bad is going on here and it is quite deliberate, no matter how few my viewers are.

🤔Let's take the image example I gave you. what is it about that image (which is a screenshot from a video hosted by Kevin Anderson) that may have made some Status Quo Defending Fossil Fuelers a bit noivy?

I'll watch the whole video again and make another screenshot of the original image (I unfortunately hadn't saved the one that was hacked on my computer before it stopped displaying).

Then I'll quote this post and post it. The reality may be as the establishment elephant below states, but I do not think so.

Okay, I just found the place on the video that I took the Screenshot that was hacked. I created another image (this time I stored the original in my computer, so hackers reading this can expect me to recreate said image every time the one I am about to post "mysteriously" will not display ) and uploaded it to this forum.

This is it:

NOW, perhaps you can see why SOMEBODY that makes a lot of money from the CORRUPT, Biosphere degrading status quo, would not want the IRREFUTABLE TRUTH quoted above (IOWmens rea modus operandi of the elite planet polluters) to get around too much...

That is just one of the hacked images. Like I said, the subject matter "dots" on all of them connect to exposing those empathy deficit disordered psychopaths who profit over people and planet. I can show you five or six others if you wish.

I had to make BOTH of the following images three times because of the lack of display "problem".

The diagram of doom from methane and the methane monster graphics I frequently used experienced the same "would not display" thing. Statistically, the dots add up. This is not coincidental nor the product of some code error on my part. I have confirmed that empirically.

You need to understand the effects of this. EVERY post I made on Disqus AND on this forum AND in the Doomstead Diner with those graphics over the last 7 years or so NO LONGER DISPLAYS those images. I am convinced it was deliberate. They are erasing graphics in posting that used the graphics to make important points. The KNOW that. THAT is why they are doing the old "Down the Memory Hole" MindFORK ORWELLIAN TRICK hither and yon. It will get worse unless these Fossil Fuel FASCIST 🐉🦕🦖 F U C K S are removed from power.

Posted by: AGelbert

O’Rourke is a member of the New Democrat Coalition, a caucus with close connections to the finance, insurance and real estate industries; Beto calls himself a progressive Democrat – with Jacqueline Luqman, Norman Solomon and host Paul Jay

Agelbert NOTE: Beto is a stalking horse for the Fossil Fuel Industry. He will lie about EVERYTHING just to get elected. Follow the MONEY that gave this crook all his support and you will see through Mr. O’Rourke's BULLSHIT.

Posted by: AGelbert

State curricula around the country are being targeted by legislation directly boosted by climate denier groups, the AP reports.

More than a dozen states have seen bills with ideological ties to both the Heartland Institute and the Discovery Institute. Several states' bills echo "model legislation" provided by Discovery to encourage presenting "both sides" with regards to science and climate. While some of these bills have already failed, nonbinding resolutions encouraged by Discovery were passed by Alabama and Indiana in 2019.

"You can’t talk about two sides when the other side 🦕🦖🐉 doesn’t have a foot in reality," climate scientist Donald Wuebbles told the AP.

Posted by: AGelbert

Posted by: AGelbert

SNIPPET: The U.S. and its allies have decided to throw their weight behind yet another coup attempt in Venezuela. As usual, they claim that their objectives are democracy and freedom . Nothing could be farther from the truth.